This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

I don't think anyone would challenge the church directly. It makes more sense that they would challenge continuing to allow someone to select which marriage licenses they will sign and which ones they won't.

There is already a movement within Christianity to get Christian clergy to refuse to sign marriage licenses.

"A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

It isn't already? When I got married it was in no church and there were no church officials (that I was aware of) in the room.

There's no requirement to have a religious ceremony, but any clergy are allowed to sign a license. Since the majority opinion rests in making things equal, you can't have two classes of enablers that can follow different rules.

It isn't already? When I got married it was in no church and there were no church officials (that I was aware of) in the room.

That's always been the case. What I'm saying is church officials should no longer be able to perform a "legal" marriage. They can sign a religious document to file in their church, just not a civil document recording the marriage in the local courthouse.